-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rottenwatch: WATCHMEN
- Thread starter DevelopmentArrested
- Start date
- Status
ChoklitReign
Member
Don't you jinx on me, motherfucker!Cheebs said:
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
I love how the Watchmen budget numbers keep changing. I've now seen it listed as $125 million, $150 million, and $200 million from various places. Either way, the question now is how much money is it going to lose I suppose.
And of course, the rallying cry for the supporters is that it'll make it up on DVD/Blu-Ray, as if those don't incur any kind of increased expenses as well. Remember folks, conventional wisdom says that a film needs to make 3 times it's budget to make money. There are more outlets to do that now, but it's still a good rule of thumb.
And of course, the rallying cry for the supporters is that it'll make it up on DVD/Blu-Ray, as if those don't incur any kind of increased expenses as well. Remember folks, conventional wisdom says that a film needs to make 3 times it's budget to make money. There are more outlets to do that now, but it's still a good rule of thumb.
ProfessorLobo
Banned
Hitman said:
I don't know if it was bad acting as much as some bad dialogue. Some lines weren't delivered very well either.
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
BenjaminBirdie said:
I don't know how it would have been better if Moore was on it?
ItsInMyVeins said:
For one, he could have ensured that certain themes remain present. Hypothetical Alan Moore may not have minded an adaptation that was not ripped off straight from the pages, thereby becoming a consultant and helping the director and script writer to implement certain complexity and depth that was not apparent (or didn't even make it) in the script written by Hayter. Movies need to be treated differently from graphic novels and a bit of film making leverage to ensure certain key elements survived would really have helped it.
Pandering to the fanboys while ignoring the masses is a poor decision in both business and film making ethics.
The movie's failure at the boxoffice has nothing to do with Moore.
It is purely that WB thought Watchmen, and graphic novels in general could appeal to far wider audience than reality dictated.
People didn't go to it because they had no interest in Watchmen, not cause of Alan Moore lol.
It is purely that WB thought Watchmen, and graphic novels in general could appeal to far wider audience than reality dictated.
People didn't go to it because they had no interest in Watchmen, not cause of Alan Moore lol.
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
joey_z said:
Didn't most themes make it into this movie, though? And I don't think the answer would be to try and fit more themes into the movie -- rather the opposite. Fewer themes but with more detail.
Personally, I would have had no problem with the story being worked around somewhat to work better as a movie.
Cheebs said:
Yeah, that's kinda my thoughts too.
BenjaminBirdie
Banned
Cheebs said:
No, it's that Watchmen specifically was illsuited to the transfer of mediums. Sin City had no problem making its budget back, if I recall correctly.
Cheebs said:
Well it is possible that had Moore been involved, he could have helped with the script to make the key elements found in the graphic novel shine. If he could manage to translate the brilliance found on the page to the big screen, then he's helped in making a good movie great. People enjoy great movies and so the hive mind may not been so lukewarm in terms of reviews, and people would have flocked to see it.
But of course that's a hypothetical Alan Moore. An Alan Moore in Wonderland.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Cheebs said:
Yep. And throw in the fact that the characters all looked like rip-offs of better known superheroes, to an audience that has no connection to them at all, and you have a recipe for failure really.
BenjaminBirdie
Banned
joey_z said:
It has nothing to do with Alan Moore being involved or not, it's that he knew that Watchmen could and should never be made into a movie.
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
BenjaminBirdie said:
I'm not sure what you mean by that, though. Illsuited because it looks kinda ridiculous as a movie, with actors playing the various "heroes"?
Were WBs expectations really that high? By the sound of it they have taken the right approach to the movie. It will surely make money for them.Cheebs said:
That said, it is kind of creepy that when its run has ended, its box office total in NA won't match or exceed Paul Blart :\
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
BenjaminBirdie said:
Hold on here one second. We've heard a lot of people in this thread say that they think it's pretty good. It's around 8.1 on IMDB and it's got 65% on RT.
So obviously you can make a movie out of it, although -- like with all movies based on books -- some of the nuances and such will be lost in translation.
BenjaminBirdie said:
Just because one average director failed to make a box office hit or a great movie out of the GN doesn't mean it's impossible. Alan Moore may be right in that a movie ripped off from the pages of the GN wouldn't make for a great film. But who's to say a bit of intelligent tinkering wouldn't have helped the transition?
That's why I stressed that had a hypothetical Alan Moore been involved, maybe some intelligent tinkering could have made for a box office hit and a well regarded film. The man behind the script of the GN would surely be able to churn something better than Hayter's script, had he been open to the possibility of a good Watchmen movie to begin with.
Both had about 150 million dollar budgets and 50 million dollar marketing budgets. TDK slightly more in budget but not by much.Decado said:
WB put 200 million in a movie that will make 100 million. AND they have to give part of it to Fox. Studios don't film movies thinking it will only make half of their budget in theaters.
They gave foreign rights to Paramount, Paramount keeps the money made in foreign markets, WB only gets the money off the english speaking markets.
Everything I've read says 120 million for Watchmen and 185 million for TDK.Cheebs said:
Haven't heard anything about advertising budgets, but since your other info seems off, I'm not inclined to believe you.
I find it impossible to believe they'd "give away" foreign rights to Paramount.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
There were plenty of people who once thought that the Lord of the Rings was unfilmable as well. Obviously we all know how that worked out, and it also managed to appeal to a mass audience, raking in the cash.
Cheebs said:
Ive heard $5.3M and $15M projected....
Hitman said:
I mentioned it, and Im sure lots of other people must have.
shagg_187 said:
What? 300 and Sin City were both pretty much panel for panel adaptations, and were profitable. Watchmen didnt make money because a) its not a good movie, or b) the source material doesnt translate into a movie that people are interested in seeing. Take your pick.
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
Solo said:
I'd go with "b". I don't think the premise of the Watchmen, no matter if it's the comic or movie, sounds that interesting to too many people.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Sharp said:
Depending on who you believe, Watchmen isn't a straight adaptation as well, although you're right, LOTR had some fairly big changes, many of which completely unnecessary. Still, you can't deny they took a far more complex story, in a genre that has not been popular with mainstream crowds, and turned it into a blockbuster.
Personally, I think there are few projects that are completely unfilmable, and graphic novels, no matter which one it is, are not amongst them. It's a visual medium already, which lends itself well to the screen. I know there is more to it than that obviously, but with the right script and director, they can be made.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Combine said:
Absolutely true, to an extent. But the LOTR mainstream success went far beyond the fans of the book. The theater was packed with people who had never read, or will ever read, them. Most had zero interest in fantasy books or movies to begin with. But yes, the Lord of the Rings, had built an audience over the 50 years since it's publication.
The point still stands though. There were MANY people who thought that a LOTR film would never work and that the source material was unfilmable.
ghst said:
That applies to literally every movie adapted from an original novel. I said the same thing about Jurassic Park when it came out, but it was still a solid movie that told the same story in a different medium.
That's all a film can ever hope to do. And you will almost never get the nuances of a literary source into one 3 hour movie; though some come closer than others, and some details matter less.
I'm surprised that it flopped, but I think it's simply because most people have only heard of the film through the trailer. And the trailer makes it look like a Fantastic Four rip off without the iconic characters or big name stars.
I don't think it flopped because "it's a bad movie"; though if the critics had loved it it would obviously have caught more interest. Plenty of bad movies do well at the box office, and that's because people think they'll enjoy them based on what they know - reviews, trailers and word of mouth. 'The Watchmen' failed to catch enough attention with the first two to make any headway with the third; and it sounds like the majority of the audience only went because they knew and loved the GN, and left unfulfilled.
Real shame. I think if more people unfamiliar with the GN saw the film, it would receive greater audience acclaim. I think it'll do well on DVD/BD.
Hydrogen Bluebird
Member
I think the main problem with the film is that people who haven't read the GN will have a hard time understanding or caring about anything in the movie.
"God's Beard!"
Member
I caught that the first time, but only because I read the comic.shagg_187 said:(the one that EVERYONE misses the first time is)Rorschach without mask, holding "The End is Nigh" sign.
Can't wait to see it again
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
joey_z said:
if moore had been involved, and the movie came out exactly the same. i would be willing to bet that tons of the negative reviews wouldnt have been so negative.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Hydrogen Bluebird said:
Disagree. I haven't read the GN and followed the story just fine. As I said in an earlier post in this thread, this isn't War and Peace folks, it's not rocket surgery or brain science. It's just not that hard to follow.
Justin Bailey
------ ------
Disagree here too, I read the GN and the disjointed story flow in the movie made it dull and boring. That's the problem. If anything, Watchmen proved that comics are more than just storyboards for movies.Hydrogen Bluebird said:
The movie is not a huge hit, but it isn't "OMFG DISASTER" either. I know a movie falling somewhere in the middle doesn't make for as good of a story, but that's what Watchmen is going to do.
Domestic box office is going to wrap up at 110-115M. Internationally the film will crawl to ~50M. DVD sales will keep this from being a debacle for WB. Nothing more.
Yeah it would be better if the film crawled to 150M instead of 110M, but eh. This won't be some huge loss that WB has to write down.
Domestic box office is going to wrap up at 110-115M. Internationally the film will crawl to ~50M. DVD sales will keep this from being a debacle for WB. Nothing more.
Yeah it would be better if the film crawled to 150M instead of 110M, but eh. This won't be some huge loss that WB has to write down.
RBelong2Us
Member
Snyder made a film for the fans and in the process alienated the general public, of course its going to drop hard when nobody who hasnt read the GN really know wtf is going on, it was a pretty cluster f*cked film.
In that sense, Snyder failed as a filmmaker
In that sense, Snyder failed as a filmmaker
MisterHero
Super Member
He didn't have an active hand in the making of the film, but he did write the original story, and by doing that he set the appeal of the story based on the content, and having written it precisely for comics, had a pace where the story could only properly play out that way.Cheebs said:
The audience appeal of the comic based on its themes and the quality of the film's "translation" are making people wary of it.
If the movie sells a lot more copies of the comic Moore wins. Aside from DVD/Blu-ray, the possible boost in demand for this comic could be DC/Warner's saving grace as well.
Nazgul_Hunter
Member
ItsInMyVeins said:
In many ways, the Watchmen premise is the same as the one for The Incredibles. That had some success
[spoilers]I'm only half joking [/spoilers]
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Nazgul_Hunter said:
Oh, no doubt. But Watchmen is also about the specter of global holocaust, and Incredibles wasn't that.
Watchmen is about a huge number of things, and that's part of the reason why it's hard to connect to as a movie and would probably have done better as a series. It has at least 5 major themes running through it, and it stops and spends quite a bit of time on each. The movie touches on most of them, but some so fleetingly that they don't have any impact.
SentientStone
Member
Just watched it last night, loved it having not finished reading the graphic novel (read up to chapter 3 only). I had no trouble following the plot either, though I understand how it might be too much for some to handle. It seems some parts might be too comical for the audience to grasp the more serious themes though, but I liked that contrast between the extreme graphic violence and general atmosphere and philosophical themes.
Now I must finish reading the original with prior exposure to the movie. :lol
Now I must finish reading the original with prior exposure to the movie. :lol
MisterHero
Super Member
it's not that people have trouble understanding it, because they made changes to make it work.Saerk said:
In my opinion the most glaring problem was that they ignored the character development of Ozymandias, and made it so that he was portrayed more as a villain rather than the point of the comic where each character had their own ideas on how to save the world/be good/be heroic.
I liked the movie, it's just that I understand why people might dismiss it.
exactly. if people see it as a straightforward story, why does it need 2-1/2 hours to tell? It's supposed to be complicated.The Lamonster said:
The Lamonster
Member
People are probably dismissing it because they marketed it as another super hero movie. It's a dark, philosophical murder mystery and should have been marketed accordingly.MisterHero said:
RBelong2Us
Member
The Lamonster said:
It's a move based on characters that are dressed up in costumes....a bit hard to market it any other way than a comic/superhero film
Prime crotch
Banned
People might understand it but won't care about it, that's a bigger problem. Funny thing is, the biggest fans of the movie will be the comic fans, the ones who get all the little good bits like the intro.Saerk said:
- Status